AMD Radeon RX 6800 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the overall head-to-head between the RX 6800 and RX 6800M?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 wins 10 of the 11 benchmark comparisons, with the only exception being Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 6800M takes a decisive victory.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6800 in the most modern DirectX 12 test?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 6800 scores 3188 versus the RX 6800M's 2238, a lead of 42.4%.

Q: Is the RX 6800M competitive in any compute workloads?

A: Yes, in Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800M scores 87621 compared to the RX 6800's 24508, which is a 72% advantage for the mobile part — a rare bright spot.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any single test?

A: The biggest delta is in Passmark GPU Compute, where the RX 6800 scores 10864 versus the RX 6800M's 5032, a 115.9% difference in favor of the desktop card.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 6800 has an average benchmark score of 30095, while the RX 6800M averages 28874, a difference of roughly 4% despite the RX 6800 winning most individual tests by larger margins.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so feature-level API support is identical.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and use a 7 nm process from TSMC, but they are fundamentally different chips. The RX 6800 uses the Navi 21 die, which is a large desktop-class silicon with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die. The RX 6800M uses the smaller Navi 22 die, packing 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical — 51.5M per mm² for the desktop part versus 51.3M per mm² for the mobile part — so the difference is purely die size and total transistor budget.

The compute resource gap is substantial. The RX 6800 has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, 96 raster operations pipelines, and 60 ray tracing cores. The RX 6800M is cut down to 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. That means the desktop card has exactly 50% more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, and 50% more ray tracing cores.

Clock speeds tell the opposite story. The RX 6800M has a base clock of 2116 MHz, a boost clock of 2390 MHz, and a game clock of 2300 MHz. The RX 6800 runs at 1700 MHz base, 2105 MHz boost, and 1815 MHz game clock. So the mobile chip actually runs at substantially higher frequencies — its boost clock is 285 MHz higher than the desktop card's. This partially compensates for the smaller chip, but not enough to close the gap.

Memory configurations also diverge. The RX 6800 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s. Both use the same 2000 MHz memory clock with 16 Gbps effective speed, so the bandwidth difference is purely a function of bus width.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 6800 dominates the synthetic benchmark suite. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 3188 against the RX 6800M's 2238, a 42.4% lead. That margin is consistent with the raw compute difference: the desktop card's FP32 throughput is 16.17 TFLOPS versus 12.24 TFLOPS for the mobile part, a 32% gap that the desktop card exceeds in practice.

Geekbench results are mixed. In Metal, the RX 6800 scores 153635 versus 113721, a 35.1% win. In Vulkan, it leads 115107 to 94766, a 21.5% margin. But in OpenCL, the RX 6800M pulls a stunning upset: 87621 versus 24508, which is a 72% advantage. This is the only test where the mobile card wins, and it wins big. The OpenCL result is anomalous relative to every other metric, suggesting driver or workload-specific optimization rather than a hardware advantage.

Passmark results are consistently one-sided. In DirectX 9, the RX 6800 scores 257 versus 147, a 74.8% lead. In DirectX 10, it's 128 versus 101, a 26.7% margin. DirectX 11 shows 214 versus 127, a 68.5% gap. DirectX 12 shows 89 versus 65, a 36.9% lead. The G2D test is even more lopsided: 990 versus 538, an 84% advantage. G3D shows 22067 versus 13261, a 66.4% gap. The GPU compute test is the largest delta of all: 10864 versus 5032, a 115.9% difference.

The pattern is clear: the RX 6800 wins by margins ranging from 21.5% to 115.9%, with only the OpenCL anomaly going the other way. The desktop card's advantage is largest in compute-heavy and legacy DirectX workloads, and smallest in Vulkan and DirectX 12 where the mobile card's higher clocks help narrow the gap.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The RX 6800 uses the Navi 21 chip with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, while the RX 6800M uses Navi 22 with 17,200 million transistors on 335 mm². The desktop part has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 60 ray tracing cores; the mobile part has 2560, 160, 64, and 40 respectively.

Clock speeds are inverted from expectations. The RX 6800M runs at 2116 MHz base, 2390 MHz boost, and 2300 MHz game clock, while the RX 6800 runs at 1700 MHz base, 2105 MHz boost, and 1815 MHz game clock. The desktop card has more memory: 16 GB versus 12 GB, with a 256-bit bus versus 192-bit, yielding 512.0 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Power and physical characteristics diverge sharply. The RX 6800 has a 250 W TDP, requires dual-slot cooling, and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 600 W suggested PSU. The RX 6800M has a 145 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. The desktop card measures 267 mm in length, 120 mm in height, and 40 mm in width; the mobile part has no listed dimensions. The RX 6800 offers 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C outputs, while the RX 6800M's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Performance ceilings reflect these differences: the RX 6800 achieves 202.1 GPixel/s pixel rate, 505.2 GTexel/s texture rate, and 16.17 TFLOPS FP32. The RX 6800M manages 153.0 GPixel/s, 382.4 GTexel/s, and 12.24 TFLOPS. Both support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6800 wins in essentially every scenario that involves sustained rendering, high-resolution textures, or compute-heavy workloads. Its 16 GB frame buffer and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the clear choice for 4K gaming with high-resolution texture packs or for content creation that needs large VRAM allocations. The 115.9% lead in Passmark GPU Compute indicates a major advantage for GPGPU tasks like rendering, video encoding, or machine learning inference.

The RX 6800M's one winning scenario is Geekbench OpenCL, where it beats the desktop card by 72%. This suggests that in OpenCL-specific compute workloads — particularly those optimized for the mobile chip's higher clock speeds — the mobile card can outperform its larger sibling. The RX 6800M also has a 145 W TDP versus 250 W, making it the only reasonable choice for thin-and-light laptops where the RX 6800's dual-slot cooler and 2x 8-pin connectors are physically impossible.

For desktop builders, the RX 6800's 75th percentile standing among all GPUs versus the RX 6800M's 74th percentile confirms a slight overall edge, but the per-test margins are far more telling. The RX 6800's nearest rivals are the RTX 3070 Ti (0.5% ahead), RTX 5070 Mobile (0.6% ahead), and RTX 2080 Ti (1% behind) — all within a narrow band. The RX 6800M sits among much older hardware: RX 570 (0.4% ahead), RX 470 (0.4% behind), and R9 M295X (1% behind). That placement says more about the mobile part's real-world standing than its average score suggests.

The Verdict

The data makes a straightforward case: the AMD Radeon RX 6800 is the superior GPU by nearly every measurable metric. It wins 10 of 11 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 21.5% to 115.9%. It offers 50% more shading units, 50% more ray tracing cores, 33% more memory, and 33% more memory bandwidth. Its 16 GB VRAM and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth give it a clear advantage for modern games and professional workloads that are memory-hungry.

The RX 6800M is not without merit. Its higher clock speeds — 2390 MHz boost versus 2105 MHz — show that AMD tuned the mobile chip aggressively to compensate for fewer compute units. The 72% OpenCL win demonstrates that in specific compute scenarios, the mobile card can outperform the desktop one. And at 145 W versus 250 W, it delivers respectable performance in a fraction of the power envelope.

For a desktop builder, the choice is obvious: the RX 6800's launch MSRP was 579 USD, and it delivers performance that rivals the RTX 3070 Ti while beating the RX 6800M by margins that make the mobile part a non-starter for any stationary system. For a laptop buyer, the RX 6800M is the only one of these two that fits in a portable chassis, and its performance relative to older desktop cards like the RX 570 and RX 470 shows it holds up reasonably well for its power class.

The verdict is simple: choose the RX 6800 for desktop performance, choose the RX 6800M only if portability is non-negotiable. The benchmark data does not support any other conclusion.